Yeah, I thought it was a brilliant promotional gimmick

It would be very handy for Nameset machines like cgScenes. [image: ZT6l_MStabletloaded.png] Machines on the left; output on the right.

Look at paint.net too. http://www.getpaint.net Bep

I'm fine with the existing smiley's

I'm not saying 530W won't work - I just listed what I have. It was a good brand for a good price so I went for it.

hmm, i might just ask for his whole rig then, ha ha. cheers for the help remus, all i needed to know is if it was better or not, and as it is, i'll give it a go! yay! pav

I foresee a new age of torture. Last week I visited a friend and I had to watch photos of her dogs for half an hour. Can you imagine what people will do with this camera?

Yup, all rendering tests give the Core i7 860 a higher score than that of the Core i7 920. A couple more advantages: Consumes less power, and thus runs cooler. Has better Turbo Boost for applications that do not use all cores. As the new 860 works on a simplified architecture, it uses cheaper motherboards. A basic Intel mobo for a Core i7 920 goes for $300 (BOXDX58SO), while a basic one for a Core i7 860 goes for $100. (DP55WB) Uses dual-channel memory instead of tri-channel one. This means you can buy a mobo with 4 slots, like the Intel DP55WB, and buy two memory modules today and two more later, while with Core i7 920 you need to find a 6-slot mobo if you want to add more memory in the future. The basic $300 mobo for Core i7 920 I quoted has only 4 slots, meaning it's a dead end if you want to take advantage of tri-channel . Also, as the tests have shown, tri-channel doesn't help render faster. Is newer than the old Core i7 920, which means it was designed with Windows 7 in mind. A better explanation: [flash=560,340:18ocnmud]http://www.youtube.com/v/lf2FuIlxyqU[/flash:18ocnmud] (edited post to add cool video)

Thanks for the reply’s. The price is pretty similar at this point, since the card is so old. Glenn

I run 64 Vista - I mainly got it to have PS run faster and I haven't been disappointed. I did have to replace a couple of older pieces of hardware though - a webcam and an audio interface - because drivers weren't available. I did keep my old XP machine around for that purpose too. It runs Sketchup and the Twilight render very effectively.

An anal bleach control tool ? Bep

@bertb said: Did not use LayOut till the first update. Now that's where you'll have the problems.

Try Apple MacBookPro on (Airport) Wifi; very good connection. Steady and fast.

I have this exact problem with IE8 but NOT with Firefox. Any ideas? (Every forum not just Sketchucation.)

What I think is a reasonable step. As already stated in other topics, the main focus will not anymore be in geo-modeling, and currently the low engagement of Google in Sketchup and the not real cross-platform compatibility set a limit to Sketchup. But I think Sketchup will completely change its appearance in some years. Chrome OS (= a browser OS) and 3d in the browser can initiate a new 3d hype and need an efficient modeling tool - maybe in the browser. (I'm not a programer, but I worry about if javascript is efficient enough to be giant leap for mankind)

I can't tell is that is a steampunk style mash up of odd parts or a working camera actually designed to look that way. The article attached doesn't really make it clear. I'd lean towards the mash up, that would be a difficult camera to use if real.

Sorry I didn't join in on this over the weekend, but my internet went down (made for a great weekend actually). @ Ken: sorry for whatever happened with the support issue. If you need support and have trouble like that again just PM me here or post on http://forums.doublecad.com and I'll make sure you're taken care of. Sounds like you're happy with TC16. Your DC problems are odd though -- I haven't encountered them. @ Linea: thanks for the compliments and support. @Jim: regarding Xrefs, it is only one-way. You can't Xref the DoubleCAD file into SketchUp. But it is 2D CAD designed for documentation, so typically you wouldn't want to do that unless you wanted an elevation or something that you could bring into Layout for a presentation. Also, creating an Xref is only in the PRO product. If you have an Xref in the drawing you can open it and update it in the free version, but can't create new Xrefs there. I'm not sure that the Xrefs are the most powerful aspect at this time. We're adding a lot of functionality to them to make Xrefs more robust. I believe the "drafting palette" functionality that we've done in the PRO version is perhaps the best time saver. It is a feature normally found in MCAD products for sectioning and documenting mechanical parts, but we've taken the concept and extended it to surface models like .SKP for architectural elevations, floorplans, sections, and more. Thanks for the thread here, and thanks for the interest. We really want to move rapidly in development, and are listening carefully to what people say, so thanks too for comments and feedback. -- William

Can't believe i only just spotted this thread, Cheers for the link remus.. much appreciated The only major site missing from the search is Turbosquid, but that will be added in the next few weeks.

Yes, ever since I've tried it, too (it was actually you, Dave, as far as I remember). Anyway, true that the image quality looks exactly like you describe plus even the SU mouse cursors don't show (just a "generic" cursor can be seen). So far, I have to tell you, YuuGuu is what I'm most "impressed" (well, say "contented") with.

Personally I don't mind new software announcements even if they're untested. Then I can download a demo and see if it fits into my work flow or if it's a waste of time. Everyones needs, work flows, and UI comforts are a little different, so even if an experienced user post a rave review about the software that they use, that doesn't mean it'll be a fit for me. However members posts still do carry some weight as right now I'm having a hard time deciding between Modo and Vue, thanks to solo and his recent gallery posts. Mike